Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | infinibrix  | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 16:51 | | Subject: | Re: Separate Leg Hip wear from Torso Bodywear? | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | Can I make a suggestion that we create a new category for parts that are specifically
designed to go over the leg pins/hips and call it ‘Hip Wear’ or ‘Leg Wear’? as
there are plenty of them and probably many more that I have missed?
In my opinion ‘Body Wear’ should be left exclusively for all those parts that
are designed to go over the Torso/Neck piece only?
|
I have also asked for this in discussions with the other admins. I believe it
will happen. 
|
Okay cool what about also splitting beards/moustaches from the rest of the bodywear
in the same way hair was removed from headgear as it always feels a bit weird
when your looking for wearable items like armour and capes only to find beards
popping up amongst them?
|
 |
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 06:06 | | Subject: | Separate Leg Hip wear from Torso Bodywear? | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Can I make a suggestion that we create a new category for parts that are specifically
designed to go over the leg pins/hips and call it ‘Hip Wear’ or ‘Leg Wear’? as
there are plenty of them and probably many more that I have missed?
In my opinion ‘Body Wear’ should be left exclusively for all those parts that
are designed to go over the Torso/Neck piece only?
* | | 24087pb03 Minifigure Skirt Plastic, Ruffled (Ballerina Tutu) with White and Dark Pink Panels, Silver Stars, and Bright Light Orange Border Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Body Wear |
[p=bb0869pb01]
[p=bb0886]
[p=bb0796pb01]
[p=28211pb01]
[p=bb0870]
[p=bb0869]
[p=bb0836pb01]
[p=18832c02]
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 17:42 | | Subject: | Re: Quote cancellation advises buyer | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickBros20 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Emporiosa writes:
| | Suggestion in regards to automatic quote cancellations:
I've never received a quote cancellation myself, but assuming it doesn't
already say so, it would be beneficial that when a quote cancellation is automatically
sent by the BrickLink system due to an item being sold out, that an automated
message to the buyer is sent out and indicating which item caused the quote cancellation
trigger.
I just received yet another message from a newer buyer asking why their quote
was cancelled and they wanted to accept it. To the buyer, it looks like sellers
are cancelling their quotes, when it's simply that a part that they ordered
is no longer available.
|
This would be a great addition! We receive the occasional message asking why
their quote was canceled. It would be a small yet efficient change to how the
quote process works.
~Brick Brothers
|
In my opinion it would be better to have parts held during the quote phase so
that the buyer can secure the parts while they wait to be quoted
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 10:27 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | We have this style of legs/robes under ‘Minifigure, Legs, Modified, Decorated’
which is all good for finding these McGonagall Robes
[P=36036pb23]
But not this style?
I understand it’s probably due to wanting to keep all the decorated sloped bricks
in one place but when the slopes are specifically designed for use with minifigures
this should take precedence as to where they are located because this is where
people will expect to find them i.e under minifigure entries. Likewise those
searching for decorated slopes for a build I’m sure will have very little use
for these kinds of decorated slope designs making them a search hindrance for
the category if anything?
|
What about these, they can be very well used in a build:
What I would suggest is just adding the word Skirt to all the 3678b* that are
for minifigs. So that they will appear in searches alongside 36036*
|
Yes and I think someone else once said they could use these robes for some curtains
when I mentioned the same thing before...
* | | 3678bpb027 Slope 65 2 x 2 x 2 with Bottom Tube with Minifigure Dress / Skirt / Robe, White Panel with Black and Gold Trim Pattern
Parts: Slope, Decorated |
but we’re really scratching around the barrel for ideas here on the basis of
a one in a million chance that someone might actually stumble across these parts
and decide to use them for their build either way there is nothing to stop people
having a glance under the minifig robes to see what they can find but overall
they don’t cater very well for builders and likewise slopes with space symbols,
computer panels and numbers don’t cater for the needs of those searching for
minifigure parts hence I feel it would be beneficial to separate them
Likewise we have Minifigure heads which have unrelated heads mixed in with them
from goldfish bowls to death star plans:-
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=minifigure%20head%20without%20face#T=P
These should be given their own category ‘Decorated heads’ also we separated
Plain Legs and Torsos from Decorated Legs and Torsos which I think was a good
move and so I think we should also consider separating plain heads from decorated
heads and separating both these again from minifigure heads
As the catalog expands I think it benefits to cater better for the two main types
of shopper ‘builders’ and ‘minifig enthusiasts’ whereas piling everything into
the same catalog entries just because they are the same design of part doesn’t
actually allow for efficient shopping for either?
|
Without the tag system suggested we can't improve things like this with the
catalog system Bricklink currently has.
If we were to move things to Category X or Y depending on how it is decorated
it will very well end in a mess of a catalog...
|
Hmmm but for now can I suggest that we add the wording 'slope for Minifigure'
in all the descriptions that way a search for 'minifigure slope' will
bring them all up in one place
If you only rely on words like 'dress, robes, skirt' people will always
end up using different interpretations with each catelog upload meaning a search
for one word may be more/less effective than another whereas if its known that
the word minifigure is always included it's easier to remember making a more
reliable way to search
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 06:45 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | We have this style of legs/robes under ‘Minifigure, Legs, Modified, Decorated’
which is all good for finding these McGonagall Robes
[P=36036pb23]
But not this style?
I understand it’s probably due to wanting to keep all the decorated sloped bricks
in one place but when the slopes are specifically designed for use with minifigures
this should take precedence as to where they are located because this is where
people will expect to find them i.e under minifigure entries. Likewise those
searching for decorated slopes for a build I’m sure will have very little use
for these kinds of decorated slope designs making them a search hindrance for
the category if anything?
|
What about these, they can be very well used in a build:
What I would suggest is just adding the word Skirt to all the 3678b* that are
for minifigs. So that they will appear in searches alongside 36036*
|
Yes and I think someone else once said they could use these robes for some curtains
when I mentioned the same thing before...
* | | 3678bpb027 Slope 65 2 x 2 x 2 with Bottom Tube with Minifigure Dress / Skirt / Robe, White Panel with Black and Gold Trim Pattern
Parts: Slope, Decorated |
but we’re really scratching around the barrel for ideas here on the basis of
a one in a million chance that someone might actually stumble across these parts
and decide to use them for their build either way there is nothing to stop people
having a glance under the minifig robes to see what they can find but overall
they don’t cater very well for builders and likewise slopes with space symbols,
computer panels and numbers don’t cater for the needs of those searching for
minifigure parts hence I feel it would be beneficial to separate them
Likewise we have Minifigure heads which have unrelated heads mixed in with them
from goldfish bowls to death star plans:-
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=minifigure%20head%20without%20face#T=P
These should be given their own category ‘Decorated heads’ also we separated
Plain Legs and Torsos from Decorated Legs and Torsos which I think was a good
move and so I think we should also consider separating plain heads from decorated
heads and separating both these again from minifigure heads
As the catalog expands I think it benefits to cater better for the two main types
of shopper ‘builders’ and ‘minifig enthusiasts’ whereas piling everything into
the same catalog entries just because they are the same design of part doesn’t
actually allow for efficient shopping for either?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 10:21 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
as I understand previous admins reason here was that they wanted to have similar
items together in one category. As they are similar a to this one so that is
why they are in the same category.
|
Okay but if there is only to be two categories like we have now i.e Hair and
headgear all those parts you mention are already categoried correctly under 'headgear'
and all other hat/hair combos should also be categoried in the same way leaving
only standalone hair for the hair category. There may be a few exceptions such
as this one with hair band which should remain under hair category especially
as its just a print rather than an actual change to an existing hair mold design
I think its fair to say anything found in the hair category should contain standalone
hair which will mean it contains items that can be widely used on almost any
minifigure whereas with regards to most of these hair/hat combos they are very
specific to either a theme, character or trade which in the example you give
are only really suitable for construction type minifigs therefore keep all the
combos, oddities and unique parts together under 'headgear' and leave
the hair category to only contain simple plain hair whether that be anything
from a side partin to a mohawk
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 08:02 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| We have this style of legs/robes under ‘Minifigure, Legs, Modified, Decorated’
which is all good for finding these McGonagall Robes
[P=36036pb23]
But not this style?
I understand it’s probably due to wanting to keep all the decorated sloped bricks
in one place but when the slopes are specifically designed for use with minifigures
this should take precedence as to where they are located because this is where
people will expect to find them i.e under minifigure entries. Likewise those
searching for decorated slopes for a build I’m sure will have very little use
for these kinds of decorated slope designs making them a search hindrance for
the category if anything?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 06:39 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | Also, can the headgear and hair issue be fixed this time around? Those pieces
that are a headgear with hair should all be stuck in either one category or the
other.
|
Can you be more specific with examples here, please?
|
Well for example, most are under "hair, combo" in the hair category, like:
are all in hair.
But a few oddballs are in the headgear category, like:
are in helmet.
It's a bit confusing.
|
Yes I agree and personally I think all those combos you have mentioned should
come under headgear including these two as well along with I'm sure many
more...
* | | 11420pb01 Minifigure, Hair Shaggy and Short with Braided Beard with Olive Green Laced Shirt, Light Nougat Bald Spot and Chin Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Hair |
The ruling should be that hair can only appear in the hair category if it ONLY
contains hair! I appreciate having bombur within headgear may not sit very well
for everyone but when I think of headgear to me its more than just hats and helmets.
Its 'gear' that is intended to go over a head piece and in the case of
the bombur that consists of both hair and body areas. Maybe in the long term
you could use headgear for all the hair/hat/body combos only and then create
a new category called 'headwear' for all your standalone hats and helmets
etc..?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 1, 2021 07:06 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Currently in ‘Body Wear’ but should be in ‘Minifigure Utensil’ with other similar
items such as Surfboards/Skateboards/Ski’s
Also not sure this one belongs under ‘Body Wear’ either?
Or this under ‘Body Part’ instead of handheld weapons/accessories but I’ll leave
others to decide?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2021 19:27 | | Subject: | Re: Have all printed Legs been deleted? | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
Well, I hope that they don't delete the non-printed versions, because when
I get large lots of used pieces, I end up with lots of misc. legs.
But I definitely would rather have all printed legs added to the catelog.
|
As far as the printed legs and hips go I have a feeling its probably just a case
of them being a bit overkill and somewhat of a burden on the catalog to keep
updated and maintained especially when you consider how few people probably search
for them. The thing is those that do search for them are unlikely to find what
they need anyway which makes the whole process of searching for these sub parts
unreliable and not very worthwhile
I guess its a bit different for the plain colours as they have far more uses
and are easier to manage and maintain in the catalog
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2021 06:24 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog missing Head Stud Type (Draco)? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | In Catalog, randyf writes:
If it would have been a new head, then that would be the easiest route. However,
since this is just the 'c'-style mold of the 'b'-style head,
you just reuse the same number as the 'b'-style head and change the 'b'
to a 'c'. In this case, you would have numbered the head 3626cpb0491.
|
Thanks Randy but just to clarify the first letter after 3626 is reference to
the mold 'c' for hollow stud or 'b' for blocked open stud right?
What about the following letters and the number at the end only I'm not familar
when you say 'Style' of head?
Also are those that contribute to the catalog expected to get this reference
correct or will it just be corrected by someone before it goes live on the
site. To be honest I always assumed that guys like you, Stormchaser, Hygrotus
etc... actually added most things and also cleared off everyone elses submissions
too but if you yourself are also having to submit catalog entries who's actually
clearing all this stuff off? Is it just Russell and a few back team staff that
we don't hear of? Maybe that includes Stormchaser too now?
| | This is part of the inefficiency of the system. You first have to create the
part using one form, then upload the image using another form. The admin team
has asked for these functions to be combined into one step, but it may take years
for that to happen.
|
Okay cool its not just me then  
Lastly should'nt the fields on some part types be auto filled for instance
it asks for dimensions on a head along with the weight though they should be
the same for all but I guess this is probably something else that needs time
to be incorporated
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2021 17:30 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| | | In Colors, Admin_Russell writes:
To get PCC's (Element IDs) to show on an inventory page, change your catalog
settings. BrickLink can display / store up to 10 PCCs per line.
|
Thank you for the response but I already have that option ticked and I already
see those element I.D's you've circled which I use and reference for
the unique parts but for non printed parts that come in a variation of colours
I inventory and store those parts by design I.D. however on that same minifig
breakdown page for the Epaulette you have design I.D 2526 visible but not for
the Bandana which still has x70 instead of Design I.D 2543 which I would have
thought would be more useful displayed in the prominent spot here and within
the order picking page?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2021 06:32 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| | | In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
And it’s clear I’m saying “official colour description” is not far from “official
part description” so why stop at the colours? Part names are as visible as the
colours on S@H or Brickset.
First, Design IDs are visible, and searchable if they are not used as the primary
BL ID. Element IDs are searcheable.
Then, “colours, Design IDs, Element IDs, but not part names,” why?
|
SylvainLS you may be very knowledgeable on the subject of Lego and you may be
a forum moderator because of that good knowledge (among other things) but you
don’t sell Lego, you don’t have to sort, organise and inventory that Lego for
selling purposes, you don’t have to locate parts and pick orders, you don’t have
to use Bricklink as a reference source to buy parts for stock, You don’t have
to worry about customers being able to correctly identify and locate what your
trying to sell in your store, you don’t have to accommodate returns or refunds
when a customer expects one thing but receives something else and you don’t have
to worry about receiving negative feedback because of these kinds of misunderstandings
and catalog mis-matches?
Therefore as a seller that does have to worry about these things I can just tell
you that whilst the official Part descriptions you mention are not necessary
on Bricklink a clear understanding between a newbie customer and a seller about
the exact colour they think they’re ordering is in my opinion essential likewise
clearly displayed element I.D’s and Design I.D’s I think are also essential and
yes fortunately it seems that much of the good work on this front is already
being added by the catmins for which I am grateful however it would be helpful
if all these references were displayed in the primary spot for instance in this
minifig part breakdown:-
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?M=sw0246
The Black Epaulette looks good with Design I.D 2526 clearly displayed but the
Bandana and Legs should also be displayed with the correct Design I.D and yes
you can click into each of the parts to find these other references but additional
clicks are not ideal for buyers and sellers who I expect more commonly use Lego
I.D’s
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2021 05:38 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog missing Head Stud Type (Draco)? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | However whilst only in the early stages of sorting I've already noticed this
part only available to list in 'Blocked Open Stud' yet I also have some
of these in 'Hollow Stud' too?
Its a 10 year old part and so is there any reason both options are not in the
catalog and can I expect more of the same or have I just been unlucky?
|
Both options are not in the catalog because no one has ever added the other version
to the catalog. And, yes, you may find more from between the years 2010-2013.
| | If stud type is so important to people how is it that its gone unnoticed for
so long?
|
Not everyone who uses the site contributes to it. In fact, only a very small
percentage of users are actually contributors. You will be doing the whole BrickLink
community a service by adding this part to the catalog.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Contributing seems like a worthwhile cause but when that means I'd be contributing
towards something I'm against i.e splitting the heads so that one stud type
does'nt properly link to the minifig inventory I'm not so sure about
that but neadless to say I have submitted the hollow stud version anyway and
made my first contribution!
but just a couple of questions:-
I took part ref 3626 from inside the head and I assume catmins will add on the
extension of the part ref?
I may have submitted it twice as I expected to be prompted to upload the image
which it did'nt do? Either way speaking of which when I took the photo I
noticed that all my Draco heads appear to have Dark eyebrows on one side and
light on reverse not just on this Hollow stud version but on all my Blocked Open
Stud ones too yet this does'nt appear to be the same for the current photo
in the catalog 3626bpb0491?
Speaking of which since the stud is'nt visible would it not have been possible
to re-use the exisitng catalog image for both Hollow stud and Blocked version
or does it still need a different image? Is my image even suitable when the eyebrows
are different?
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 19:16 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | In Colors, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
And what happens when these don't match? Some parts have different official
LEGO colours yet have the same BL colour, and vice versa.
|
It does'nt stop bricklink from correcting all those colours that can be corrected
which is the vast majority! Why for instance is Brick Yellow not even mentioned
anywhere alongside all those parts that are Tan? Brick Yellow is an official
description and so its imperative that those official descriptions are highlighted
and searchable within the BL catalog, surely?
|
Beware with “official description.”
Do you also want “Pavilion” to be added to
because “Pavilion 6X3X5” is TLG’s name for the part?
It’d make sense.
Then what about “Animal Ass. For No.14” and “Animal Ass. For No.14 No.2” to
They are official names, surely they should be searchable?
“Animal No.8 Body” is also so explicit, I’ll let you find what it is….
Nah, my favorites are “Mini Wig, No.153”, “Mini Figure Wig No. 93” (note the
consistency), and all the dozens of them.
And I didn’t even cite mispelled names or Danish names. “Figur Hjelm No 2” what’s
that? Actually not a helmet.
TLG’s names (parts or colours) are so awful, it’s been said even TLG don’t use
them: they use the numbers.
That being said, colour names could be in the colour guide: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=635575
|
Unless Lego colour refernces are clearly visible when searching for parts a colour
reference guide alone is not enough. The site needs to be clear and translateable
to all users NEW and old alike not just translatebale for all those old timers
to this site who have it all memorized!
Also its clear I'm refering to Official Colour descriptions I've never
suggested implementing all those Mini wig No.... descriptions and what not, besides
we have Lego Design I.D's and Element I.D's which again is something
else that should also be visible alongside the parts
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 18:56 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Tracyd writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | In Colors, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
And what happens when these don't match? Some parts have different official
LEGO colours yet have the same BL colour, and vice versa.
|
It does'nt stop bricklink from correcting all those colours that can be corrected
which is the vast majority! Why for instance is Brick Yellow not even mentioned
anywhere alongside all those parts that are Tan? Brick Yellow is an official
description and so its imperative that those official descriptions are highlighted
and searchable within the BL catalog, surely?
|
Where else in the world is there a Brick Yellow color? It is Tan. TLG should
have called it Tan, but for whatever reason called it Brick Yellow. That doesn't
change the fact that to most people looking for it will call it Tan.
|
But thats not the argument because Whether we like it or not the correct official
colour is whatever The Lego Group called that colour! You seem very sure that
its 'Tan' however others might suggest its beige or cream but in the
end it does'nt really matter what does matter is that the all important colour
reference from the Lego site is directly transferable to Bricklink even if that
means both colours are displayed alongside those relevant parts but not just
for Brick Yellow but Earth Blue, Dark Stone Grey and every other official colour
reference
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 13:39 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
And what happens when these don't match? Some parts have different official
LEGO colours yet have the same BL colour, and vice versa.
|
It does'nt stop bricklink from correcting all those colours that can be corrected
which is the vast majority! Why for instance is Brick Yellow not even mentioned
anywhere alongside all those parts that are Tan? Brick Yellow is an official
description and so its imperative that those official descriptions are highlighted
and searchable within the BL catalog, surely?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 12:19 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, THEMIDDLEBRICK writes:
| | Sorry to resurrect this dead thread, but as a buyer I find this to be more than
an annoyance. For instance I am in the middle of buying many different color
tiles for a large mosaic. If I am purchasing some from pick-a-brick (thank you
VIP points) and some via rebrickable, it gets very complicated to track and account
for the different color names, almost impossible for some colors. There isn't
currently a good list that cross references the different names and color id
numbers (not one that is kept up to date at least).
Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
I could'nt agree with you more!
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1245263
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 07:59 | | Subject: | Catalog missing Head Stud Type (Draco)? | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Whilst it will already be known to many that I'm not a fan of the fact that
the catalog insists that sellers separate their head stud types and with their
being no change in sight I am now begrudgingly starting to sort through my heads
so that I don't run into problems with customers because regardless of what
I state in my store terms about "Not separating stud types" this won't count
for much in the eyes of Bricklink(Admin has already told me as much!) if/when
a customer chooses to complain and leave negative feedback for receiving the
wrong stud!
However whilst only in the early stages of sorting I've already noticed this
part only available to list in 'Blocked Open Stud' yet I also have some
of these in 'Hollow Stud' too?
Its a 10 year old part and so is there any reason both options are not in the
catalog and can I expect more of the same or have I just been unlucky?
If stud type is so important to people how is it that its gone unnoticed for
so long?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 13, 2021 09:29 | | Subject: | Re: Color verification part 40378 | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, eBricksOnline writes:
According to the Lego site as far as silver colours go it only shows up as:-
Description Silver Met.
Category Bricks, Special
Element 6097639
Design Number 40378
and Silver Metalic tranlates to Flat Silver on Bricklink but as already mentioned
not all parts/colours belong to a set or are catalogued on the Lego site indefinitely
The situation is then made worse by Bricklink not using Offical Lego colour names/references
which means people can translate them to the Bricklink site and colour palette
incorrectly and so although the part also shows up on BL in Pearl Light Gray
it may be that it only exists in Flat Silver or as Lego call it Silver Metalic.
This is another important reason why using Legos offical colour names should
take precedence over using colour names just because we like the sound of them
better?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1098690
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1031456
|
In the first link you essentially have 3 different colours and they are described
correctly by TLG?
The fact that some of these are slightly different shades I’m sure you are also
aware is common with many other colours too such as Pearl Gold and Yellow though
we don’t separate those or give them their own name either?
If people feel the need to separate those shades even though their tone can vary
to the point that its non conclusive then the comments can always be used saying
Darker/lighter than usual or if it’s a really old colour from a time before Lego
named their colours then I see no issue with Bricklink keeping its own colour
names for those but to purposely use different colour names for the bulk of colours
when TLG have already provided a name for them will always create ambiguity between
different users interpretation of how that matches to bricklinks description
of colours which is detrimental to the accuracy of the catalog? The name of a
colour is like a part number if it does'nt match exactly then you are always
going to run into problems with people guessing or making their own judgments
about what best fits the colour name given by BL?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 13, 2021 06:58 | | Subject: | Re: Color verification part 40378 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, eBricksOnline writes:
According to the Lego site as far as silver colours go it only shows up as:-
Description Silver Met.
Category Bricks, Special
Element 6097639
Design Number 40378
and Silver Metalic tranlates to Flat Silver on Bricklink but as already mentioned
not all parts/colours belong to a set or are catalogued on the Lego site indefinitely
The situation is then made worse by Bricklink not using Offical Lego colour names/references
which means people can translate them to the Bricklink site and colour palette
incorrectly and so although the part also shows up on BL in Pearl Light Gray
it may be that it only exists in Flat Silver or as Lego call it Silver Metalic.
This is another important reason why using Legos offical colour names should
take precedence over using colour names just because we like the sound of them
better?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 11, 2021 08:17 | | Subject: | Re: Please Change Name of Part (973pb4140c01) | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | BTW, why did you change "Sensei Wu" to "Wu Sensei"?
|
Because some Wus were sorted together by name and others were scattered all over
by name. Now all the Wus are together. If you'd like the title to say "Wu,
Sensei Wu" that's no problem. It still searches just fine no matter the
word order.
But the character's name should be the first word in the title and this fella's
name is Wu. Sensei is an honorific term. That's just a rule I made up,
by the way. Because we have no guidelines.
|
The only danger with using certain definitive rulings like this is that it can
make it very determental to the way the character titles are displayed and read
plus you also have to consider how far it could end up going?
Vader Darth
Maul Darth
Sideous Darth
I beleive Darth is also a form of title?
Then you have:-
Flitwick Professor
Mcgonagall Professor
Lupin Professor
Cody Commander
Ackbar Admiral
Leia Princess
I could go on.....
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2021 13:28 | | Subject: | Re: How does a person inventory a minifigure? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | My thoughts exactly and so is there a long term solution for this in the pipeline
or will the catalog have to remain hindered for the sake of keeping stud types
separated?
|
We've asked for a long-term solution for all part variants. Roughly, it
would involve a single catalog entry that buyers or sellers could customize with
specific variants. This will allow people who don't care about variants
to never worry about them. It will also allow much more specificity and sorting
of variants for collectors. So a major win for everyone.
The only problem is how such a system would integrate with inventories, but I'm
sure that can be solved.
As for whether we'll get what we asked for or not . . . well, we do have
XP. And Studio. And a program for building mosaics. And the ADP. And IC.
And the CEP. So . . . priorities, I guess.
|
As a short term solution is it not possible to merge minifig head types and insist
that people leave the stud type in the comments. I understand it will affect
people from being able to narrow down their wanted list searches but having to
purchases heads manually is a small price to pay if it means having a more complete
and accurate minifig inventory?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2021 13:06 | | Subject: | Re: How does one inventory a minifig? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| |
And then the site itself has failed here by not designing a way that collectors
can separate these minor differences while the majority of users can ignore them
if they choose.
|
My thoughts exactly and so is there a long term solution for this in the pipeline
or will the catalog have to remain hindered for the sake of keeping stud types
separated?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2021 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: How does one inventory a minifig? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | P.S.
Please also check with your set what type of stud head has.
You submitted it as hollow stud (c type)
[p=3626c]
LEGO rectently changed mold for transparent heads to vented stud
[p=28621]
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?q=28621*
so what type of stud head from this set has?
|
I don't want to sound like I'm being critical over the good work you
guys do but when stud types take such precedence and are so detrimental to the
navigation and linking of correct heads to minifigures it adds very little useful
funtionality in my opinion. I'm sure most just want to know what heads are
intended for what minifigure(s) and if we can cater for those that want to know
stud types then great but when its done at the expense of cataloging certain
heads that supposedly don't belong or link to any minifigure at all or
that are split between different minifigs depending on the stud type you have
to ask why a random stud type that was never inteneded to have any importance
by TLG is so important to the catalog? Please can someone also clarify my question
about selling minifigs here:-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1244104
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 8, 2021 07:54 | | Subject: | Re: Why 38014pb01 is not a Minifigure? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Mirko8710 writes:
I recall that this was one of the reasons that there was talk about changing
the minifigure category to 'Figure' or 'Character' as to use
the term minifgure to describe this along with so many other parts I'm sure
seems very odd to most.
I made a previous suggestion here:-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1192727
but as you can imagine it’s an absolute minefield and everyone has completely
different ideas of what would work for the best and then of course there are
certain category limitations or so I'm told?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 6, 2021 06:04 | | Subject: | Re: Country of user in forum message list | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | Plus any seller is welcome to add their country already if they want to. When
I used to post sales, I often put UK in the title for this reason.
|
Yes but even though you and I might be inclined to include the country of origin
in title so as to ensure we focus on the right audience so many don't bother
and how many times have you clicked into a generic topic/issue that has no relevance
and is limited to another country the other side of the world?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 6, 2021 05:51 | | Subject: | Re: Country of user in forum message list | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, dosenfant writes:
| | Hi there,
It would be great if the country of a user could be displayed in the forum's
message lists - along with the other user information like feedback, etc. Especially
in the "Sales" forum you could then quickly deduce whether the offer might be
interesting for you or not.
As an example I'm from Germany, but many offers are from the US which are
usually not interesting to me due to high shipping costs.
Best regards
Daniel
|
The rectangle in the upper right corner of every post has the users country,
feedback, whether the store ships to you, and so on.
|
Yes but by that point he's already had to click into many forum posts that
may not otherwise be of any interest to him which I think is what he's trying
to say. For instance he may be insterested in deals or other regional issues/topics
posted by someone from his own country but not interested in clicking into topics
concerning deals/matters that are isolated to other parts of the world!
With that in mind it would be a worthy addition though unless it only involves
a quick adjustemnt I can't see BL spending any amount of time/work fixing
up what is already an outdated forum? but I share the OPs reasoning and I would
also like to see country flags alongside every order in my Order lists. Perhaps
there is already an option though I've not been able to find one?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
In truth the Oscar probably only warrants one entry which in my opinion is of
course the more complete one! though I don’t have a major issue with this as
long as there are no more than two entries for any one minifig however the thing
I have a bigger issue with is that we are using a completely different reference
number for each? idea078 and idea079 when they are both centred around the same
minifig and so it might be an idea if we’re going to do this sort of thing that
we just use idea078 for the fully accessorised entry and then just add a ‘b’
or something for any alternative barebone entries - idea078b
If the same additional letter is used each and every time at least people can
look to check to see if there is a barebone version of the same minifig and know
how to search for it
We already have some examples of this in the catalog where these minifigs are
the same and use a similar refernece to define a different colour:-
And here it’s the same minifig but without the proton pack though again it would
benefit from using the same letter at the end each time - gb001b instead of gb001i
And then from there a minifig like this would benefit from an additional non
backpack entry - sw0824b
or at least thats my thinking....
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 06:44 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, bje writes:
| | I fully agree, for what it is worth. I have no problem with BL defining what
a minifigure is, what it must consist of, how it must inventoried or indeed how
it must be listed. But then BL must have clear written rules and they must allow
catmins to actually apply those rules consistently.
|
But defining clear written rules for how ALL minifigs MUST be listed doesn’t
always serve its purpose for the benefit of the catalog as the Oscar minifig
has shown and it’s better to have a catalog that best serves those customers
who shop here rather than blindly following strict rules that are detrimental
to the way a particular minifig appears in the catalog?
I also have full confidence in the catmins judgement as to what they feel should
constitute the final minifig for each catalog entry as they still follow the
same guideline rules set out for the majority or minifig entries but that doesn’t
mean that other members of the community shouldn’t be able to challenge a minifig
entry or voice an opinion on what parts they feel should or should not be included.
In the end the catmins will decide whether a minifig entry warrants special circumstances
or not but once decided we then all adhere to what is expected based on the final
photo and so it’s not as if rules are not in place for us all to follow?
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2020 05:55 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, chetzler writes:
| | | | In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included.
|
I've thought this for a long time. There are some some strange minifigure
entries in the catalog. For catalog purposes, guidelines are better than rules.
If the rules are always blindly adhered to, there seems little need for a catmin--anybody
could do the job by just following the rules. I'd rather have thoughtful
people make a decision about what is the most reasonable inventory for a figure
without being bound to a set of rules that can't possibly account for all
current all future cases.
Below is what I always thought was a reasonable exception to the "no hand-held
accessories" rule as the accessories are meant to be an extension of the fig's
alien arms. This exception has existed for a long time, so clearly there is
precedent for going with reasonable vs pedantic.
|
and maybe extending that further to characters that are always seen to look a
certain way for instance Shredder always wearing gauntlets, Karlof always shown
with big fist hands, and a werewolf with claws etc...
Vader on the other hand is'nt always weilding a Lighsaber thereby making
it more of a handheld accessory intended to be added/removed
Either way we have many Ironman minifigs with blue boosters under their legs
but are they any more essential to those minifigs compared to some of the other
parts I've mentioned? I guess in the end those parts don't matter too
much one way or the other as everyone will just follow and include what is shown
in the picture but yes descisons made on a case by case basis is better than
sticking to strict rulings that trip over themselves with their own inconsistencies
especially where key componenets for certain minifigs appear to be missing?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 15:52 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, runner.caller writes:
| | | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
Yes the Dollar in the bag should'nt be included as to me its no different
to any other minifig tile accessory such as a map, catapult, gamer pad etc...
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, BulbaNerd4000 writes:
| |
Is it too much to ask for both?
-Tony Stark
Why don't we make just make an entry for each one?
|
I'm not against this idea but I have a feeling the Admins/Bricklink will
be plus you also have to consider how far we can stretch things because if you
give every minifig two entries does that actually benefit Bricklink for the better?
I mean do we really want to see caped and non caped versions for each and every
minifigure for example? Well I would'nt have a problem with that either but
there are certainly some minifigs that would benefit a lot more from having two
entries and it may be better starting at these before overcomplicating the catalog
with too many entries when there is only one single part different between them
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:16 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
You make a very good point. So I'm back to where I started, confused
What I'm less confused about, is that it can't be easy for those
making catalog listing policies.
|
Ha ha yeah but I think thats the thing, maybe we need less stict policy/rules
on how minifigs are handled and deal with them on a case by case basis by cataloging
them in a way that best serves the majority of the community. If I'm alone
with suggesting Oscar should have a trash can then by all means we should leave
him without it though I'm not sure if that is the case?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:49 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:35 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I have sympathy with you and the admins are discussing all of this right now
and I believe you will get some of what you are asking for.
I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Okay that explains a lot because I did'nt realise it was'nt actually
attached to the trash can though that said I think if we want to try and make
the catlog minifig entries appear as complete as possible then I'd personally
say that the trash can should probably be included with the rest of the minifig
but saying that as mentioned I would'nt have a problem with two entries for
certain minifigs either although whether the Oscar warrants the need for two
compared to some of the more elaborate entries I'm not so sure.
The ghostbusters minifigs are a good example of where there is a benefit for
two entires (with/without proton pack) and I hope this can be followed through
to other similar minifigs of which we're probably only talking about less
than 1% anyway
In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included. Both a chima eagle without wings and Oscar
without a trash can I'm sure most people would see as incomplete especially
if it then means they then end up having to buy the additional parts (handheld
items aside) separately which almost defeats the purpose of a complete minifig
entry
On the otherhand jay without a jet pack and Moroff without his backpack still
seem complete enough to be worthy of being cataloged barebone and in truth I
think this would be the most common way to buy and sell them anyway if users
were given the choice?
But thats just my take on the subject...
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 07:29 | | Subject: | Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 209 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
I’m not sure anyone would consider the newer entry complete for instance would
anyone actually display the Oscar minifig without the trash can either way the
instructions point to the parts being arrow directed down into the trash can
anyway?
Then compared with these minifigs that have non-essential accessories:-
The yoda has a part only useful with the actual build and if you want Jay In
his kimono outfit you have to specifically purchase him with the multiple part
jet pack whilst the other ninja characters in matching outfits are sold standalone
as should be the same for all?
I’m then confused further as we have Ghostbusters characters in the catalog with
and without their proton packs so are they supposed to be fully accessorised,
barebone or a mix of both, which is it?
To be honest I like the two options given for the Ghostbusters minifigs and whilst
the majority of minifgs should only have one entry I think it would make sense
to have two entries for certain minifigs like the Jay without jetpack and other
minifigs like this one with an option to buy with and without a backpack:-
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2020 13:25 | | Subject: | Re: Incomplete Minifigures? | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, axaday writes:
| | In Suggestions, steamingpile writes:
| | I understand the desire to eliminate the incomplete minifigures from the listings.
But is there any chance that actual "minifigure" listings could come without
all the accessories?
For example sw0824 has 3 actual minifigure parts, and a 14 piece backpack. Wouldn't
the acutal minifigure end at the 3 actual minifigure parts, and not include the
random bricks?
|
If I were the king, we would make a category for Brick Built Minifigure Accessories
that would include backpacks and weapons that are official builds. Then the
minifigure listings would lose all backpacks and minifigs that come with a hat
and a hair option would have both in the inventory. A BUNCH of Chima minifigs
would disappear.
|
I agree that some re-thinking should be considered as if we’re going to say that
multi-part backpacks and capes are an essential part of a minifigure build then
why stop at just those parts because if we’re saying we want minifigs to appear
exactly as they appear in the instructions then I agree that minifigs should
also include satchels, sword holders, weapons and accessories too?
The only obstacle I can see is where you have for example Indiana Jones iaj001
which appears in 12 sets and the accessories given by each set may vary from
including the whip, satchel and pistol to perhaps not including one of those
parts or perhaps even coming with him wearing handcuffs instead?
However logic says that you don’t accessorise and photo him wearing handcuffs
you simply accessorise him with the most common accessories for that minifig.
If the first uploader accessorises and photos him with satchel, whip, and pistol
then those should then become the MUST include parts for that minifigure or even
if the first photo uploader doesn’t include the pistol that may still seem a
valid upload to go with, On the other hand if someone photos and uploads without
the satchel or whip then someone may request to revise the photo to include what
they consider a vital component to the overall look of Indiana Jones so that
it does include these elements
I know it’s not a perfect solution but then does it really need to be? As long
as the photo includes the more relevant parts associated with the minifig in
question and buyers can see what they will get I think this is more helpful to
buyers than leaving them having to hunt around looking for a satchel or lightsaber
hilt?
When I first arrived here I found it strange that none of the minifigure photos
showed accessories and I really didn’t know what to expect would be included
either?
I think it’s fair to say that I think minifgs should either be properly fully
accessorised or listed barebone which for Indiana Jones would be just the hat,
head, torso and legs. Obviously not all minifigs are as simple as this so what
constitutes barebone would need careful consideration but minifigures are a huge
part of the market on Bricklink and so I feel having options would be of greater
benefit to the platform, in fact it would be nice if there were two options for
most minifigs for example iaj001 could be a fully accessorised Indiana Jones
with iaj001b (The ‘b’ representing the fact that the minifig is bare bone with
just the main minifig components head legs torso etc..
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 9, 2020 12:03 | | Subject: | Re: Please show part numbers in Shopping Cart | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | The shopping cart while checking out shows a picture and description of
the part you want to buy, but no part number.
Please add the part number somewhere here.
Thank you.
|
+1
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 10:02 | | Subject: | Re: Compulsory message before negative/neutral fb | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, peregrinator writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | The feedback page encourages to resolve issues before leaving feedback:
Please try to resolve any disputes before posting a complaint. Feedback must
not be used to communicate with your trading partner or ask them a question
|
Why not require the user leaving the feedback to check a box saying "[] I have
tried to resolve this issue with my trading partner before posting this"?
|
+1
or if not this the pop up prompt to the buyer as also suggested
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 09:56 | | Subject: | Re: Compulsory message before negative/neutral fb | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, psusaxman2000 writes:
| | In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
|
| | While a pop up message sounds all well and good, they only work for a short time.
Once someone knows that it is there, they tend to just ignore them.
|
but your talking as though people regularly leave negative feedback because buyers
will only see the pop up warning in situations where they are about to leave
negative feedback?
Its also more geared towards newbies who may not be aware that communication
is key on sites like Bricklink and ebay rather than just leaving feedback without
a second thought!
| | I like the idea of having some secondary or hybrid concept and I think it could
help eliminate some work for the admins with feedback removal. How about if
when sending a non-positive feedback, the system puts a set hold time (say 2
days) before it is officially posted, but also sends as an email and/or message
to the other party giving them a chance to respond. The response would then
allow the parties to (hopefully) better align and come to a better resolution.
There would obviously have to be some kind of limit on this for those transactions
that are actually bad and need to be noted as such, but this would give some
help to the process.
|
I think it's just overcomplicating things if the buyer is confronted with
a pop up warning prior to leaving negative feedback where Bricklink suggests
it might be worth contacting the seller before committing to the feedback, that
should be good enough.
In the end some buyers will take note of that and show willingness to see if
the situation can be resolved with the seller whilst others won't and for
those that don't there's little point delaying the inevitable feedback
from being posted
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 07:06 | | Subject: | Re: Compulsory message before negative/neutral fb | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Shintaku writes:
| | | | The feedback page encourages to resolve issues before leaving feedback:
Please try to resolve any disputes before posting a complaint. Feedback must
not be used to communicate with your trading partner or ask them a question
|
Yes that is actually suggested and I would welcome it to become compulsory.
|
I think a pop up type message might be better that says something along the lines
of:-
"You are about to leave a Negative feedback but have you considered contacting
the seller first? Most sellers will be keen to resolve issues given fair opportunity
to do so?"
If the buyer is able to leave a kind of draft negative that appears after a certain
time it will just put the sellers back up and make them feel like they're
being blackmailed and having to resolve because of the impending negative rather
than because they want to resolve off their own back!
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 30, 2020 08:41 | | Subject: | Re: Color question | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Bendix writes:
| | Duplo snowflake of set 10899, Frozen Ice Castle is listed as Trans Clear
Maybe the correct color should be Trans Milky or Trans White?
|
Having checked the part on the Lego site, Lego refer to its colour as Trans White
which translates to Trans Clear on Bricklink and the important thing here is
to always catalog the colour not as we see it but as the colour description given
by Lego/Bricklink otherwise you end up creating additional sub-categories of
colour which Lego themselves don't recognise and which leave sellers with
no clear indication of where they should list their item for sale also there
are other colours that vary in shade such as Pearl Gold and yellow and if you
start doing sub categoris for one colour I'm not sure where it would end?
Bricklink would have an even bigger colour pallette with no clear certainty as
to where an item should be listed?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 23, 2020 09:36 | | Subject: | Re: Anyone use counter scale? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, novabrick writes:
| | In Inventories, nielnc3 writes:
| | Hey, we are thinking about buying a counter scale to help with inventory - we
are hoping to find one that can count small, very light pieces such as 1x1 tile,
1x1 round plate, etc all the way up to 2x4 bricks.. does anyone use a counter
scale to help be more efficient pulling orders? Or to help with adding inventory
more quickly? Thanks for the feedback.
|
We have one. But there is always an error margin. Since not all parts are the
same weight to the last microgramm, especially used ones. So there can be a bit
of fluctuation. We only use it on really high digit counts like 5000+.
Setup takes like weighing 250 or something of a part and then add the whole lot
to get a fairly accurate number. I wouldn't trust it by just weighing a single
part and go up from there.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
I should add that the weights I've used are just an example I have no idea
what 100 of any part actually weigh
| | Yes and if sellers intend to rely on scales they should always ensure that the
customer gets either the correct amount or a couple extra rather than being short.
Therefore if you count and weight 100 parts at 28g probably safer to ensure that
the weight is around 29g on the scales to allow for marginal errors as from a
customers perspective its not very acceptable to find parts missing when they
have been weighed and estimated instead of properly counted
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 23, 2020 09:32 | | Subject: | Re: Anyone use counter scale? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, novabrick writes:
| | In Inventories, nielnc3 writes:
| | Hey, we are thinking about buying a counter scale to help with inventory - we
are hoping to find one that can count small, very light pieces such as 1x1 tile,
1x1 round plate, etc all the way up to 2x4 bricks.. does anyone use a counter
scale to help be more efficient pulling orders? Or to help with adding inventory
more quickly? Thanks for the feedback.
|
We have one. But there is always an error margin. Since not all parts are the
same weight to the last microgramm, especially used ones. So there can be a bit
of fluctuation. We only use it on really high digit counts like 5000+.
Setup takes like weighing 250 or something of a part and then add the whole lot
to get a fairly accurate number. I wouldn't trust it by just weighing a single
part and go up from there.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Yes and if sellers intend to rely on scales they should always ensure that the
customer gets either the correct amount or a couple extra rather than being short.
Therefore if you count and weight 100 parts at 28g probably safer to ensure that
the weight is around 29g on the scales to allow for marginal errors as from a
customers perspective its not very acceptable to find parts missing when they
have been weighed and estimated instead of properly counted
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 22, 2020 08:52 | | Subject: | Re: Change entry for minifigs, NEW / INcomplete | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Pazzo writes:
| | Hi all,
recently some of our parts/sets/minifigs are removed from my inventorie.
Before you would get a notification, but nowadays items are removed without further
notice.
I do understand that it is necessary to list the items correctly, but I do have
a problem with removing minifigs from the inventorie.
For example:
SW0105: Lando Calrissian, Cloud City Outfit (Smooth Hair)
We do have this minifig in stock, it is new, but the cape is missing
We do not have an option to list the minifig as NEW and INcomplete, but the minifig
IS completly new!!
Either change the way we can add this to our inventorie (like sets) or let us
list them as new! It would be incorrect if we would list them as USED, as clearly
they are NOT.
just my 2 cents,
be cool and have fun!
Eric
|
I've also just had that very same Lando minifigure removed because of the
missing cape and yet there is surely some value to be added to the bricklink
marketplace by giving people access to rare minifigures like this. See here...
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1223220
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 18:51 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, I won't promise anything will happen.
But this is the plan:
1. I'm opening discussion right now, in this thread, on changes in
item type and and category for any items wrongly categorized. I expect discussion
will probably focus on parts and last around two weeks.
2. I'll post all changes deemed worth making on this page:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2487
3. The catalog team will discuss internally during the month of September.
This will give everyone time to prepare for item movements. I'll post public
updates/reminders occasionally during August and September.
4. The actual changes will be made on October 1st, 2020. A record of
the changes will be retained for reference purposes for two years on the page
linked to above.
I know some of you are excited about this. It's the first time BrickLink
has been widely open to correcting some longstanding categorization issues.
I'm excited, too. I will fully read and carefully consider every post made
in this thread. To help me out, please:
1. Snip replies (remove extraneous content before replying).
2. Stay on point (don't post digressions).
3. Keep everything in this one thread.
4. Don't expect miracles. Some ideas may have to be added to the
roadmap as separate projects.
5. Try to limit complaints. Or, if you believe everything is already
properly categorized and don't like change, complain loudly and often. Site
management will be watching.
Thanks to everyone for the input you're about to provide. I don't know
how this will go, but I expect it to be interesting.
|
Whilst I feel the 'modified' categories work quite well as a place to
seach for the more unusual bricks and plates, I've always felt that clips
are quite a specific thing that people may wish to search for and so would the
catelog benefit from moving parts with clips to their own categories?
Plates with Clips:-
4085
15712
92280
6019
63868
11476
Bricks with clips:-
60476
30241b
60583b
30237
Whilst you could do the same with bricks with pins, connectors, sockets and handles
I fear people may struggle to determine all those different aspects and even
more so if the part contains a clip aswell as a handle or pin but when it comes
to peoples understanding of what a clip is I think everyone shares that same
idea? Though the catalog describes the part 4081b as having a clip but to me
its more of a pin socket?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 11:10 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | In Colors, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, misbi writes:
| | Now that TLG has acquired BL, isn't it about time that we set about resolving
conflicting colour names? The flesh/nougat adjustment shows that it's possible,
so when are we going to rename BL Dark Green to Earth Green?
Obviously there are many others which need aligned over time, but currently Dark
Green should be an immediate priority.
|
I can't see why this would be a priority at all. Dark Green is clearly a
better name than Earth Green. TLC has come up with some odd color names over
the years. I think it would be best for Bricklink to keep their color names.
David
|
I think the change of ALL colour names should be a priority because however bizarre
Legos colour names may seem to us it is the manufacture who made those decisions
for their product and so it’s their name choices that should take precedence?
If an established and well-known paint brand names one of their colours ‘Bright
Yellowish Green’ distributors and retailers should follow that colour guide because
by re-labelling it as ‘Lime’ they only create confusion for their customers.
The customer knows the brand of paint they want and they know the colour that
the manufacture calls it and yet the customer is expected to somehow work it
out for themselves or if they’re lucky stumble across a third party colour guide?
The variations of the Lego product are confusing enough at the best times so
why create further confusion in areas that are easily fixed?
|
Bricklink has been around for 20 years. Bricklink being owned by LEGO is a recent
thing, so for a couple decades Bricklink customers have become used to the Bricklink
color names. Changing them because TLC bought Bricklink is not logical.
|
You could say that Lego have been around longer still and yet naming them different
to what Lego(The actual Manufacture) call them is logical?
and I appreciate you may have been with BL from near the start but I would still
have to adapt to the offical Lego names the same as anyone else
| | Furthermore, you compare color names for LEGO parts to color names for well-known
paint brands. You mention "The customer knows the brand of paint they want and
they know the colour that the manufacture calls it," however, that's not
the case with LEGO. Very few LEGO customers are going to know that TLC calls
regular green "Dark Green" and that they call dark green "Earth Green." Changing
names like that at this point would cause a lot of confusion.
David
|
But not all Lego enthusiasts use Bricklink simply because they find it too complicated
or are unaware of its presense or what it can offer them however that may be
about to change with the release of XP along the wider community slowly being
made more aware of Legos aquisition of the site
Many people simply use Brickset and/or the official Lego sites as their reference
point after all going direct to the official manufacure to look up parts from
a set would seem like the logical step to take for your average Lego household
not yet fully accustomed to BL?
Whatever confusion this might cause for existing BL users will be nothing compared
to the confusion that awaits future BL users that are expected to know all this
stuff?
Exisitng members ar'nt going to go anywhere and so Bricklinks target market
needs to be encouaging new users and making things as simple for them as possible!
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 08:33 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, hpoort writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | | | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | I think the change of ALL colour names should be a priority because however bizarre
Legos colour names may seem to us it is the manufacture who made those decisions
for their product and so it’s their name choices that should take precedence?
If an established and well-known paint brand names one of their colours ‘Bright
Yellowish Green’ distributors and retailers should follow that colour guide because
by re-labelling it as ‘Lime’ they only create confusion for their customers.
The customer knows the brand of paint they want and they know the colour that
the manufacture calls it and yet the customer is expected to somehow work it
out for themselves or if they’re lucky stumble across a third party colour guide?
The variations of the Lego product are confusing enough at the best times so
why create further confusion in areas that are easily fixed?
|
Once again, no thank you.
|
But if it’s just a preference thing why stop there... Why not just ignore the
Lego part numbers too and use our own/old peeron codes? But wait we already do?
I’ve never understood why the biggest Lego market place ignore Legos colour system
and ignores Legos official part numbers. Granted you can search by the Lego references
but we are still presented with this 3626cpb0730 instead of this 6003296?
|
You are presented with both on the catalog item page. Because for more than half
of the parts the official Design Id (BL: Part number) or Element Id (BL: PCC)
is not known, is not referring to the part (single part or combination) refers
to a technical difference (such as ABS versus PC or PE) that is not distinguished
on Bricklink and because there is relational information hidden inside the Bricklink
numbering system.
|
I don't see 6003296 here:-
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3626cpb0730#T=C&C=90
and I would argue that an official Lego part number should mean more to a larger
group of people compared to an unofficial reference like this 3626cpb0730 either
which way I think I'd rather see the official part numbers displayed in the
prominent spots and have those other references searchable but hidden from view
instead? If its all about having the ability to differenciate between different
variaitions of the same part why not just add a letter on the end 6003296b, 6003296c,
6003296d? The description will explain the differences and so does it really
require the part reference iteself to try to explain those differences?
| | And for the color names: because Bricklink and the whole AFOL market had to choose
their own naming systems long before LEGO published their color names - which
are confusing at best.
|
I'm aware and appreciate that but as Lego have long since published their
colour names we should be making a better attempt to mirror what they use or
if we still strongly feel we cannot bring ourselves to use them we should use
the power and persuasion of the AFOL community to suggest to Lego to adopt Bricklinks
colour system instead?
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
